Geology and Earth ScienceWhen Something and Nothing Means Everything
Over the past year there have been countless articles circulating in newspapers and web forums debating the accuracy of our modern theory of evolution. More specifically these articles are attacking evolution and are in favor of what has come to be known as ID or Intelligent Design. As a strong believer in evolution and a scientist by profession I must say reading these articles has been, at times, excruciatingly painful. Not because the proponents of ID are speaking against evolution or even because ID relies on an Intelligent Designer, but because ID relies on the lack of information and/or in some recent articles by its proponents, both online and in print, bad science or flat-out fallacies.
In a recent article posted to Renew America, author Fred Hutchison does just that in his article “Evolution vs. Intelligent Design: which model has more integrity?” Through a couple leaps of logic he no doubtedly comes to the conclusion that proponents of ID are operating at a higher level of integrity than evolutionist. For the most part many of the ideas stated in the article are simply differences in opinion, not scientific fact, but what really got my attention was the misinformation cleverly titled, “Do evolutionists suppress facts?”
Am I part of a conspiracy? Do I finally belong to something : )
In this section of the article the author claims that evolutionist have covered up the fact that no complex animals appear in Precambrian rock. He also claims that evolutionists have suppressed information so much that many American scientists and students of science have never even heard of the Cambrian Explosion. Mr. Hutchison continues his deception by stating that, “Scientist in Communist China have significant freedom of thought and publication. Biologic science in democratic America is under the dictatorship of the evolution establishment. However, if President Bush has his way, high school children will be allowed to hear about the “Cambrian Explosion”
As a professor I don’t know a better way to rebut a statement like this than to offer the following government funded links:
PBS: Evolution Library; the Cambrian Explosion
USGS Info Bank
(I think maybe everyone but Fred Hutchison knows about this)
Before I get too annoyed, what is my point? The author lists a series of examples of “our” cover-up, most of which are inaccurate portrayals of evolutionary theory and or logical fallacies. This is the problem with the current discussion of ID. Proponents of ID have strategically taken the discussion out of the scientific realm and placed it in the layman’s lap. Now instead of experts the general public and school board officials (who are elected community members) are being asked to review scientific theories. I wonder if we will do the same for new theories in medicine.
Is evolution a perfect theory? No, but so far it is the best scientific theory we have. Proponents of I.D. consistently point to the so called holes or gaps in evolution theory and claim that because science has yet to answer some questions the whole theory must be flawed. This is simply not true, and the whole idea behind science is wrapped tightly within that very statement. Science is yet to answer some questions, not because we can't ever answer them but because we are still learning and our technology is still improving. Our answers are only as good/current as our technology.
Natural History Magazine: Intelligent Design is a wonderful article that presents the views of three proponents of ID followed by a rebuttal from a proponent of evolution.
Intelligent Design Network
The National Center for Science Education
In the Beginning: Compelling evidence for Creation
In a recent article posted to Renew America, author Fred Hutchison does just that in his article “Evolution vs. Intelligent Design: which model has more integrity?” Through a couple leaps of logic he no doubtedly comes to the conclusion that proponents of ID are operating at a higher level of integrity than evolutionist. For the most part many of the ideas stated in the article are simply differences in opinion, not scientific fact, but what really got my attention was the misinformation cleverly titled, “Do evolutionists suppress facts?”
Am I part of a conspiracy? Do I finally belong to something : )
In this section of the article the author claims that evolutionist have covered up the fact that no complex animals appear in Precambrian rock. He also claims that evolutionists have suppressed information so much that many American scientists and students of science have never even heard of the Cambrian Explosion. Mr. Hutchison continues his deception by stating that, “Scientist in Communist China have significant freedom of thought and publication. Biologic science in democratic America is under the dictatorship of the evolution establishment. However, if President Bush has his way, high school children will be allowed to hear about the “Cambrian Explosion”
As a professor I don’t know a better way to rebut a statement like this than to offer the following government funded links:
PBS: Evolution Library; the Cambrian Explosion
USGS Info Bank
(I think maybe everyone but Fred Hutchison knows about this)
Before I get too annoyed, what is my point? The author lists a series of examples of “our” cover-up, most of which are inaccurate portrayals of evolutionary theory and or logical fallacies. This is the problem with the current discussion of ID. Proponents of ID have strategically taken the discussion out of the scientific realm and placed it in the layman’s lap. Now instead of experts the general public and school board officials (who are elected community members) are being asked to review scientific theories. I wonder if we will do the same for new theories in medicine.
Is evolution a perfect theory? No, but so far it is the best scientific theory we have. Proponents of I.D. consistently point to the so called holes or gaps in evolution theory and claim that because science has yet to answer some questions the whole theory must be flawed. This is simply not true, and the whole idea behind science is wrapped tightly within that very statement. Science is yet to answer some questions, not because we can't ever answer them but because we are still learning and our technology is still improving. Our answers are only as good/current as our technology.
Natural History Magazine: Intelligent Design is a wonderful article that presents the views of three proponents of ID followed by a rebuttal from a proponent of evolution.
Intelligent Design Network
The National Center for Science Education
In the Beginning: Compelling evidence for Creation
